This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

5 Things To Ponder: Smorgasbord

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Lance Roberts of STA Wealth Management,

I have been extremely busy this past week which has put me behind on my usual reading regime. However, with Easter now past, this weekend will allow me the chance to catch up. Therefore, this week's compilation of things to ponder is a veritable smorgasbord of topics that caught my attention this past week.

1) Have We Reached The Limits Of Growth? By Desmond Lachman via The American

I wrote an article recently discussing that since the turn of the century the U.S. has averaged the lowest rate of economic growth in history. The question remains as to whether this stagnation is a short term structural issue or a long term secular stagnation.

"The new high priest of long-term economic pessimism seems to be Robert Gordon, a renowned U.S. economics professor at Northwestern University. In a recent influential paper, he has forcefully argued that the rapid economic progress made over the past 250 years could very well be a unique episode in human history rather than a guarantee of endless future advance at the same rate. This thought, together with his assessment of the major structural headwinds presently confronting the U.S. economy in the form of bad demographics, declining education standards, and high debt levels, leads him to the most dismal of conclusions. He gloomily predicts that for the bottom 99 percent of the U.S. population, living standards will barely increase over the next 100 years."

Desmond Lachman argues against Dr. Robert Gordon's thesis of secular stagnation stating:

"Fortunately there are good grounds to question Gordon’s grim view. Over the past few years, there appear to have been a number of major technological breakthroughs that could be of a transformative nature. Indeed, we would only seem to be at the very start of the development of robotics and artificial intelligence, three-dimensional imaging, the fuller exploitation of the human genome, and much more. It would seem to be presumptuous to dismiss such breakthroughs as holding little prospect for drastically improving our living standards and for fundamentally changing the way that the workplace will operate."

The question is this: While advances in technology can be accretive to human kind, it can also be a destructive force to economic growth. Is there an equilibrium?

2) Don't Get Dazzled By Glittering Growth by Jason Zweig via WSJ

David Einhorn recently made a very controversial statement in a client letter espousing that"

"There is a clear consensus that we are witnessing our second tech bubble in 15 years.”

Of course, while the media went to extraordinary lengths to dispel that notion. While trotting out numerous fund managers to explain why the current technology market was anything like in 2000, they failed to recognize the most important point which I addressed recently in "Historical Market Comparisons Are Meaningless:"

"However, the one simple truth is'this time is indeed different.' When the crash ultimately comes the reasons will be different than they were in the past - only the outcome will remain same."

It is in this regard that Jason Zweig discusses with great simplicity that "when you pay too much for a dream stock, you might end up with a nightmare."

"Over the past year, investors became increasingly excited over the hot performance—and even hotter future—of industries like biotechnology, Internet retailing and social media. But the ferocious selloff in these stocks over the past few weeks should remind every investor of a basic rule: You can be absolutely right about the future and still get wiped out.

Correctly forecasting a company or industry's potential for growth is important—but not overpaying matters even more.

 

As the economist Max Winkler quipped in the late 1920s, investors often discount "not only the future but the hereafter"—meaning that the price they pay for their hopes is so high that they won't make any money even if their hopes are realized."

 3) Have Profits Finally Peaked? by Buttonwood via The Economist

"Instead, chief executives are turning to that old device for boosting sluggish profits: takeovers. According to Thomson Reuters, the global value of mergers and acquisitions in the first quarter was 36% higher than in the same period of 2013. The right takeover can result in cost cuts through economies of scale—although in the long run, the academic evidence in favour of takeovers is mixed.

 

A takeover boom is a classic signal of the final stages of a bull market, a sign that financial engineering has taken over from genuine business expansion. And that is hardly a surprise: the current rally is already the fourth-largest and the fifth-longest-running since 1928."

4)  Student Loans - Forgiveness & The Next Bailout via ZeroHedge

"Student debt has nearly doubled since 2007 to $1.1 trillion, disproportionately driven by the growth in graduate-school debt.

student-loan-Debt

The plans' long-term costs have greatly outpaced the government's predictions. In the last fiscal year, debt absorbed by the repayment plans from the most widely used student-loan program—Stafford loans—exceeded government expectations from a year earlier by 90%.

 

A report Monday last week from the Brookings Institution, a centrist think tank, offered one of the few preliminary examinations of the programs' impact. The most popular plan could cost taxpayers $14 billion a year if it becomes available to all borrowers as Mr. Obama has proposed, while fueling tuition inflation, it said.

 

Loan forgiveness creates incentives for students to borrow too much to attend college, potentially contributing to rising college prices for everyone," the study said. The authors recommend scrapping the forgiveness provisions."

Also Read:  The Next Massive Bailout by Dan Kadlec via Time

5) Hoisington Quarterly Review & Outlook Q1-2014by Dr. Lacy Hunt

I never miss reading Dr. Lacy Hunt and Van Hoisington's quarterly reviews of the economy and the markets.  This is a particularly interesting issue as they take on the effectiveness the of the Federal Reserve's ongoing monetary programs and their continually overly optimistic assumptions about future economic growth.

 

 

Hoisington Q1-2014 Newsletter


 

 

Bonus: Who Does The Government Owe Money To?by Craig Eyermann via Advisor Perspectives

Craig-Eyermann-140425-Fig-1

"The biggest surprise in this edition of our chart (compared to the previous edition) is the appearance of Belgium on the list, which jumped ahead of several other nations by more than doubling the amount that is being lent to the U.S. government from the small European nation over the last six months. Since Belgium is a major international banking center, what this really represents is the accumulation of U.S. debt by other foreign entities through Belgium's banks in much the same way as London's banks have historically served this role for countries such as China"

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:09 | 4697219 0b1knob
0b1knob's picture

< The end of growth is a result of the financail meltdown.

< The financial meltdown is a result of the end of growth.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:25 | 4697267 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

While advances in technology can be accretive to human kind, it can also be a destructive force to economic growth. Is there an equilibrium?

No. Artificial intelligence will replace 60-100% of the workforce over the next several decades. Put that into your economic models and see what happens...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:46 | 4697322 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Very true,  many of the mundane job will be done by machines.    I suppose people in a nice restaurant will want a human waiter (I guess...) but ya gotta wonder what percentage of jobs will eventually be eliminated.

It does change the dynamic of the welfare-state discussion when most of the population of a country is no needed for anything.  Now,  we can laugh at the worthless losers in the bottom 50%,  but what happens when it’s the worthless losers in the bottom 80%. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:53 | 4697347 Seer
Seer's picture

There won't be enough volume to support "luxury" to the upper-crust if the bottom is gone.  It all works like USPS and junk mail, without all that volume of junk mail regular mail couldn't exist (it would be to costly).  There's something to be said of the phrase: "strength in numbers"- businesses never look to be small, and for a reason...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:31 | 4697462 max2205
max2205's picture

Little ADA here please.....please.make charts color blind friendly. ...thanks

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 13:13 | 4699046 Matt
Matt's picture

What do you need volume for, if you own a large chunk of land and hordes of robots, aka slaves without will? If the robots can make more robots, and manufacture whatever you want, what do you need the poor masses for?

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 19:20 | 4699873 Seer
Seer's picture

Fair question.

Nothing happens without energy.  Economies of scale didn't happen by chance.  Therefore even with robots there will be a loss in this regard.  Labor is not the crushing cost that most believe.  Also factor in sabatoge by the remaining outcasts: if you don't think this is significant you need to read what the extra premiums costs are for covering all these sorts of things.

Most of the industrial plants operate at huge scales.  Imagine jsut wanting a little bit of something.  It'll still require a LOT of energy to ramp up the equipment, robots or not.  Or, consider those massive open-pit mines- need a bit of iron-ore do ya?  Even if you're rich you're going to have to be responsible for covering more of the costs now that there are less people to pool in on it.

While I admiit that I cannot quantify these things with any real degree of certainty I CAN state that neither can anyone else.  And when I see complete omisisons I tend to help fill them in, and I hold others who omitt such analysis as not very likely to get things right: we are often want to ignore such things and just "hope" that they work out- if TPTB are taking this approach then they're only fooling themselves.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:26 | 4697454 Stuck on Zero
Stuck on Zero's picture

Technology replaces jobs only on a temporary basis.  The advent of the diesel tractor between 1910 and 1930 brought about the demise of 80% of all agricultural jobs.   That was about 40-50% of all jobs in the U.S.  All that labor moved to the cities and burbs and went to work building machinery and a giant service industry.  Many such shocks have occured in history and humankind survived nicely.  We will survive.

 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:54 | 4697485 James_Cole
James_Cole's picture

Technology replaces jobs only on a temporary basis. 

No, technology has often replaced jobs permanently but opened up more and 'better' opportunities related to the innovation. That fact has changed, everyone who works in a tech related field seems to understand this, surprised you don't. General public has some catching up to do. 

This guy sums it up:

http://www.ted.com/talks/erik_brynjolfsson_the_key_to_growth_race_em_wit...

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 19:30 | 4699890 Seer
Seer's picture

Technology is a PROCESS.  It's a set of instructions.  It is NOT physical material.  Without energy and raw inputs to technology and its processes ain't nothing happens.

Are people not getting why there have been skirmishes heating up around the world?  News flash, countries aren't on the brink of war over tryhing to take "technology" form one another, it's about/over physical resources.

If technoogy was the panacea then Japan would still be on top: Japanese completely ruled in tech.  They've crumbled in part because of competition or course, but it has been mostly due to their lack of physical resources (inputs are increasing- the competition is made up of younger countries whose workers lower wages offset high resource costs [but eventually this degrades- look at demographics and energy imports, it couldn't be more obvious]).

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 20:24 | 4697759 John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

You forgot to mention the end of the horse and buggy.  The demise of the typewriter and then the word processor (remember Wang).  Oh, the sky is falling, the sky is falling.  Where will the new jobs be?  No more carriage drivers, switchboard operators, blacksmiths, elevator operators etc.   Oh, I long for feudal times, of 16 hour days toiling in the soil to grow just enough food for your family and plowing with horses and smelling their manure on city streets.  Oh, I long for gas lighting preferbly using whale oil.  This new electricity based lighting is costing whaling jobs.

Signed,

An antidiluvian from the flat earth society.

The reduction of natural entropy/disorder is the sole purpose and goal of sentient life forms.  Thus science and technology rules until our ultimate heat death. Get used to it!

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:24 | 4700124 Seer
Seer's picture

Flat-earthers are those who believe that there's an infinite amount of resources available (the technology-will-save-us-all folks ASSume that the planet as the necessary feedstock to input to their techno-fabrication processes).

What you/I/others WANT or don't WANT does no matter in the entire scheme of things. What will BE is what it's going to BE.  And since this is a finite planet the cornucopian viewpoint fails on the logic front (unless aiming for mass die-offs).

Be interesting to watch the world's employment numbers to check on:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145595/worldwide-employed-full-time-employer....

I'm sure technology is going to employ all those 750 MILLION folks in India living on $0.50/day, any day now...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:35 | 4697296 icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

The financial meltdown is a result of the end of the Rule of Law.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:47 | 4697326 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

When did that happen?    Hasn't been much "law" for a few centuries now.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:31 | 4697612 bonin006
bonin006's picture

In the S&L crisis about 30 years ago 1000's of crooks went to prison. I would say there has been a dramatic reduction in the application of justice over the last 30 years. I am not saying justice was good 30 years ago, just that it is much worse today.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:47 | 4697661 Ness.
Ness.'s picture

Free Jon Corzine... oh wait.  Nevermind.

 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:50 | 4697335 Seer
Seer's picture

It's the result of diminishing easy-to-get resources.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:57 | 4697362 zaphod42
zaphod42's picture

Now, I am sure you get it!!  

 

We will all die with oil in the ground, unaffordable.

 

Craig

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:12 | 4697566 Seer
Seer's picture

Yes, sap, I DO get it.  Been that way for a LONG time now... (I've had enough exposure to various things and thoughts to be pretty damn confident that I've identified what "fundamentals" really means.)

"We will all die with oil in the ground, unaffordable."

Unaffordable as expressed in energy terms.  If we toss out all notions of human-derived valuations and look at things from purely nature's perspective we'll see that it's ALL about energy.  Other life forms evolve to maximize their energy consumption: those that have been around for a long time can only be seen as doing a pretty good job of it.

Our System is sure to die.  Humans, however, still have a shot at continuing on (until the next glacial period, though it's possible that some might make it through that as well- I have no clue, as my crystal ball doesn't seem to survive that period).

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:25 | 4700125 Seer
Seer's picture

Which set?

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:16 | 4697240 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Belgium, again.    Who would think those guys had so much use for our debt.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:50 | 4697333 Doña K
Doña K's picture

What if it is backdoor for the US treasury to buy its own debt secretly.

 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:19 | 4697246 mtndds
mtndds's picture

Rothchilds

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:19 | 4697247 debtor of last ...
debtor of last resort's picture

Belgium, and tribal Afghan drugdudes, and the pope of curse, pardon, of course.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:21 | 4697256 Rainman
Rainman's picture

I take blue and red on the wheel for ' who is really going to get hosed ? ', Alex.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:23 | 4697260 peaceful
peaceful's picture

Look 99% of people are politically numb anyway. What are you going to do introduce critical pedagogy so they learn to think and in turn realize everyone around them is a stupid apathetic douche? No way so keep telling them lies so they keep defining themselves through purchases until the game caves in. The one percenters will slowly take money elsewhere and this country will resemblea dystopian ruin from a sci fi flick. No changing the course

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:23 | 4697261 peaceful
peaceful's picture

Look 99% of people are politically numb anyway. What are you going to do introduce critical pedagogy so they learn to think and in turn realize everyone around them is a stupid apathetic douche? No way so keep telling them lies so they keep defining themselves through purchases until the game caves in. The one percenters will slowly take money elsewhere and this country will resemblea dystopian ruin from a sci fi flick. No changing the course

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:47 | 4697323 Seer
Seer's picture

"The one percenters will slowly take money elsewhere and this country will resemblea dystopian ruin from a sci fi flick. No changing the course"

Given that our entire civilization is unsustainable I'd have to say that it's a certainty that it'll end in ruin.

Not sure where the "one percenters" are going to escape to.  Unlike in the past there won't be anyplace that's left unaffected by the ravages of growth.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:05 | 4697377 Doña K
Doña K's picture

The one percenters are actually 0.1 and they do not have to go anywhere as they are diversified everywhere and own or can influence all goverments.

The question is where can an honest 10%nter can escape to or preserve assets.

It's getting more difficult, but the best way, I found so far, is to blend in, keep a low profile, a high credit score, show a little bit of debt with low interest, stash cash and PM's, have fun and vote libertarian or third party every time.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:32 | 4697467 Seer
Seer's picture

"The one percenters are actually 0.1 and they do not have to go anywhere as they are diversified everywhere and own or can influence all goverments."

For now.

"It's getting more difficult, but the best way, I found so far, is to blend in, keep a low profile, a high credit score, show a little bit of debt with low interest, stash cash and PM's, have fun and vote libertarian or third party every time."

Yeah.  Don't flaunt: it's like hollering- "look at me, I'm a target, shoot!"  I don't care much about "credit," but managing it and debt is just a matter of upholding your commitments and being mindful of your financial affairs.  I cannot really make any forecasts or suggestions on "investing," but I DO own land (Ag), it's my "guess."  Voting?  I don't think the system deserves any validation; but, I suppose there's some entertainment value in it...

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 02:53 | 4698314 Doña K
Doña K's picture

I hear you and IMO you are in the same sphere of thought of ZH's. Keep up your thoughtful commentary even if not everyone agrees all the time. 

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:26 | 4700128 Seer
Seer's picture

And you too!

I appreciate anyone who can formulate their own thoughts (not just regurgitate).  And working toward wisdom is really what matters...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:26 | 4697268 Peter Pan
Peter Pan's picture

Human beings are not growing intellectually or spiritually as a whole any longer so of what benefit is economic growth other than to make us more consumer driven and longer lived due to medical changes and more entertained due to more and more new toys.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:35 | 4697472 Seer
Seer's picture

"what benefit is economic growth"

Because the System requires it.  When you're racking up "interest" you HAVE to have economic growth.  The System has no provisions for zero/no interest (long-term).  Further, the middle class can be said to be a product of economic growth; and, for sure, the upper-class sure does well by it too (because they "oversee" the System).

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:31 | 4697287 PoorMan429
PoorMan429's picture

Wealth concentration is deflationary while money creation is inflationary. So you have rising prices plus money scarcity Equals zero growth. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:38 | 4697303 Seer
Seer's picture

"Over the past few years, there appear to have been a number of major technological breakthroughs that could be of a transformative nature."

TECHNOLOGY IS A PROCESS it is not MATTER!  Regardless of what magic incantations you chant, what wiz-bang gadgets you come up with, if you don't have the necessary PHYSICAL matter to toss into the mix (feedstock) then you're no more than a cook sitting in the kitchen reading recipes- no ingredients and nothing comes out!

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:49 | 4697328 Seer
Seer's picture

Come on you punk-ass, down-voting pussies, bring on your debate.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:53 | 4697346 zaphod42
zaphod42's picture

They are planning on creating matter, using flux capacitors and used Teslas.  No!  Wait!  That is for time travel...

You seem to have made a valid assessment of the situation.  We have met the enemy, and we are screwed.

 

Craig

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:01 | 4697371 Seer
Seer's picture

No shit, huh.

It's why TPTB could never "repent" or tell the truth.  On one side people see "them" as totally incompetent, and on the other "god-like" in their ability to produce technological solutions (or suggest that they're sitting on a ton of them).  "Coginitive dissonance" just doesn't convey the insane levels of stupidity...

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 13:28 | 4699070 Matt
Matt's picture

The material is becoming more available. Instead of gold, silver, rare earths, etc. iron, carbon and silicon can be used to make a lot of stuff. printed circuits made of graphene embedded right in the structures. With additive manufacturing, the amount of energy and material used can drop substantially.

The bigger issue is whether a practical, viable new energy source is possible, or whether civilization will be stuck with pure renewables - ones that do not require massive investments of hydrocarbon fuels to make and maintain. 

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:33 | 4700137 Seer
Seer's picture

"The material is becoming more available. Instead of gold, silver, rare earths, etc. iron, carbon and silicon can be used to make a lot of stuff."

Yes, but that takes ENERGY.  Substitution is not always possible.

"The bigger issue is whether a practical, viable new energy source is possible, or whether civilization will be stuck with pure renewables - ones that do not require massive investments of hydrocarbon fuels to make and maintain. "

OK, I see you have an understanding...

Energy cannot be created or destroyed.  It either is among us or it's not.  I'd venture out on a limb and say that the convenient energy caches take a fair amount of time to accumulate and that in order to speed up that process it costs energy.  There's a reason why most of nature is dialed in to more real-time available energy (except perhaps oil eating microbes or such).  I just think that we're going to stretch ourselves past the point of salvage chasing the holy grail of energy (again, nature just isn't giving away its secrets).  Where is it that we get to hear this debate of what happens if it doesn't materialize?

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 22:47 | 4700293 Matt
Matt's picture

I don't think there is much to debate. Either we find a new source of abundant energy, or we collapse to pure renewables. I do not think humanity will get a second chance at the oil and coal energy abundance.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:54 | 4697350 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

I'm sensing exhaustion is the anti-hopium den over the last few day.   Perhaps, when all the anti-hopium is gone, there's just no point in blogging. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:06 | 4697388 Seer
Seer's picture

The truth, however, stays.  It wouldn't be so bad if there was actually some attempt at a debate, but it just seems to come down to a popularity contest, that people just don't want to hear something because it would spoil their views (which are in direct conflict with truth/reality).

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:16 | 4697422 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re:  It wouldn't be so bad if there was actually some attempt at a debate

I personally think debate is overrated.    My view:   the brain is a machine and it's configured in a finite number of specific configurations which - when taken together - make humans appear more complex than (say) house-cats.   And what we call opinions or positions are really manifestations of our brain configuration.   Which is why the Red Team people and Blue Team people will never agree on most things because their respective brains are unable to grasp the other brain type's reality.   So, there's really not much point debating things.   The various political Teams and ISM which win or lose in society are just a brain configuration popularity contest. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:59 | 4697698 Element
Element's picture

Yeah, well, I still want to put out a contract on Penny Wong though.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:34 | 4700138 Seer
Seer's picture

Just when I think that US politics is fucked up...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:11 | 4697408 Doña K
Doña K's picture

Reading ZH can be an eye opener for the young and the non-anointed

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:17 | 4697428 Seer
Seer's picture

Yeah, but you'd think that most have been exposed to the simple laws of thermodynamics, that and simple geoography (demonstrating that the earth is not flat, meaning it's finite).

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:19 | 4697434 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re;  meaning it's finite

But, don't forget the 2nd law of bullshit:

X (the earth in this case) + bullshit -> anything you want to believe.

The magic of the human brain and bullshit.  

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:39 | 4697480 Seer
Seer's picture

Please don't confuse actual physical realities with human perceptions.  "bullshit" is an interpretation of the product of/from a human brain (unless, that is, one is talking about what comes out of the south end of a north bound bull), it has no stake in the real, physical world (which doesn't have any awareness or concern over humans and human-thought processes).

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:48 | 4697509 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Re:  it has no stake in the real, physical world

It has a huge stake,  we're living in and - on this blog - talking (incessantly) about the effect bullshit has on reality.  You can create a government program to create huge bombs which can (really) blow-up the world because bullshit was created for the dumbasses that the other guy had one more bomb than you do.    Bullshit matters,  actually bullshit is all that matters for most humans.

Sure,  at some point real reality will intervene, but...   When, or what it will look like, is anybody's guess.     The problem with living with a human brain is: because it's designed to believe, create, and repeat bullshit its very difficult to know what reality is. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:01 | 4697543 Seer
Seer's picture

Um, still not buying it...  Yes, I'm well aware there is "bullshit" out there and that lots of people prefer to engage in it.  I don't care.  My message stays the same no matter; rather, it's not "my" message, it's nature's message.

Very simple.

1) The planet is a sphere, in which case by very definition it is finite (how many people are going to dispute this?);

2) Matter cannot be created or destroyed (are there people who dispute this?);

3) Technology is NOT matter (no disputing this either).

So, sure, there are people who would prefer to engage in talking bullshit (and you are doing what?).  I don't, because I realize that bullshit is just that.

Further, I will make extra effort to jump on someone like Desmond Lachman who should know better than to make such statements that fly in the face of logic and physical reality.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:57 | 4697682 Element
Element's picture

Yeah, and water is wet too, and I could tell you that 15 times every hour.

And after about the 415th time you'd totally switch off and never listen again.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:36 | 4700139 Seer
Seer's picture

Yeah, but I wouldn't walk away claiming that it wasn't.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:51 | 4697519 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 The Earth in fact is slightly "ellipsoid".  That is why we use Nautical vs Statute miles for measurment.

  Always appreciate your comments Seer

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 19:04 | 4697548 Seer
Seer's picture

Yes, thank you for providing accuracy: the sailor in me recognizes nautical miles.  I worry about telling someone that they're standing on an "ellipsod," that they might think it some piece of gym equipment...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 20:25 | 4697763 Things that go bump
Things that go bump's picture

I didn't realize those things were still taught in public school. I understood that what they are teaching is conformity and political correctness,  reinforcing indoctrination by arresting a few grammar school children for pretending an object, such as a pencil, is a gun, a thing children are known to do, thus frightening parents into forbidding children to play in such an antisocial manner. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:22 | 4697429 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Yeah,  but it's also a turn-off if your a normal pathologically optimistic authority-respecting (or worshiping) human.    It's a pretty small crowd on here. 

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 22:40 | 4698024 Errol
Errol's picture

NOTaREALmerican, you made a very important point that people need to understand.

Years ago on LATOC (an early peak oil blog), someone posted a link to a version of the Meyers-Briggs personality test (which provides a four-letter code that represents the taker's personality in four areas), inviting all the persons on the blog to take it and report the results.  So everyone took the same version of the test, he collated the results, which were: 80% of the respondents were of a single personality classification, which represents 3% of the general population!  Another 10% differed in only one letter (one aspect) of personality.

So, it appears that people on that peak oil blog were NOT a representative sample of the general population.  I'll dare to extend this finding by suggesting it is very possible that people who frequent other reality-based blogs are not representive of the general population, either.

There is good evidence that the majority of humans are not really capable of rational decision-making; rather, they make emotional decisions and rationalize them after the fact.  In my opinion, most people are really disinterested in reality and critical thinking, they are very willing to delegate those tasks to "leaders".   Most folks on ZH are not sheeple; they are a self-selected minority of people who are willing to seriously discuss material reality.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 10:13 | 4698696 MrSteve
MrSteve's picture

So we are dealing with the fact that perception is reality. With misperception, we get distortions of material reality and the rational science of belief management as practiced by business and government. Big Brother has a lot of enablers who are intentionally misrepresenting themselves and so a lot of rational people are duped into false realities, like this time it's different or it's not currency debasement.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:38 | 4700146 Seer
Seer's picture

Situation Normal, Fucked Up...

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 20:34 | 4697784 John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

E = m *c^2

Lots of mass, means even more energy.  Thinking only about breaking chemical bonds to release energy is so pre-1940s.

QED

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:39 | 4700148 Seer
Seer's picture

Can't wait until we figure out how to collapse the planet for all that energy! </sarc>

Tue, 04/29/2014 - 03:12 | 4700339 MeelionDollerBogus
MeelionDollerBogus's picture

hey smartie-pants http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-04-21/uncovered-california#com...

you haven't finished all your math homework:

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-04-14/34-american-adults-who-a...

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2014-04-14/34-american-adults-who-a...

It's been since the 15th, starting to think you're dodging a question you can't answer.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:49 | 4697334 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

   China is winding down it's F/X diversifications which were largely responsible for the "resilience" in the strong aud until this week. Japan has been pretty hot and heavy on U.S.T. purchases this month.( unless they're buying Zimbabwe and Southern Europe as an hedge) Wednesday April '23rd.  19:50       JPY         Foreign Bonds Buying    [ -463.9B]           114.6B    

   Additionally, I mentioned the PBoC repo operations over the last (2) weeks, which have largely been for show. 

 It's a widely held thought that China has been diversifying {via} UST backdoor purchases, using Belgium as the front.

   The laugh was on us thinking Mr. Yellen was using Euro Clear I guess? More likely the BIS sovereign connection.

  Suspicion grows that China is exporting deflation worldwide by driving down yuan – Telegraph Blogs

  I guess the "fuck your neighbor" as long as he can fuck you mantra is ok. (pari passu) Bitchez.

  Please consume large quantities of Alcohol this weekend. It's now safe to consume in large quantities and we may all be rehypothecated before Sunday.

    'It's OK to drink six pints a day': Alcohol expert says up to 13 daily units AREN'T harmful for health | Mail Online

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:52 | 4697338 NOTaREALmerican
NOTaREALmerican's picture

Alcohol expert.    That would a good degree to major in.  

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 17:56 | 4697361 Spungo
Spungo's picture

I think it's funny how they were nice enough to say the government owes money to the federal reserve. That money will not be paid back. The fed will take the write off, which means the debt has been officially monetized. When is the last time we paid off ANY of our debt? I think Clinton had 1 year, and then the next closest was some time around the 1960s. That means the government has run 1 profitable year, on a non-GAAP basis, for the entire time that I've been alive. If the government used GAAP accounting, which would include depreciation and future liabilities, that number would drop to 0 profitable years during my life time.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:13 | 4697412 Seer
Seer's picture

As I see it the Fed will swallow and choke to death.  It's not really the US govt, so it can act as the govt's scapegoat.

The Clinton era was full of magical accounting tricks.  Don't forget the dot.com bubble.  Lots helped to rake in a windfall of revenues for the govt; it was never to be long-lasting.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:19 | 4697435 Spungo
Spungo's picture

"< The end of growth is a result of the financail meltdown.
< The financial meltdown is a result of the end of growth."

Neither. The end of growth started with the meltdown, but the meltdown is not the real problem. Things meltdown all the time. Most businesses eventually go bankrupt or fade into obscurity. What happened to 3dfx graphics cards? What happened to those computers with alpha processors? What happened to shoe shine boys? What happened to letter carriers? Mechanization of farming caused a very deep recession because most people worked in farming. The economy recovers when those failed businesses collapse, assets are sold off, and the workers go do something that is productive and profitable. There was a time when every office had a million secretaries. Most of them were eventually replaced with MS Word and email. Did they stay unemployed forever? No, they did something else. Maybe they started selling the computers that replaced them, and they could sell that product because they could clearly explain why a computer is more efficient than a human. This is how the economy grows. It constantly becomes more efficient as technology improves.

Right now the economy is broken as fuck because the government is preventing it from improving. Why did GM go bankrupt? It's because the economy doesn't need GM anymore. We already have too many cars. Why is the government bailing them out? The government ensured that thousands of highly skilled people, or at least experienced people, continue making shit nobody wants. Why does the government insist on keeping welders in the GM plant where they provide absolutely no value to the economy? Why can't we put those people to work building new gas and oil pipelines? Why do we bailout things like steel companies? If your steel company is not profitable, that means we don't need more steel. We already have enough steel. 

I know it sucks when your job is eliminated and you need to find something else. I've been there. My dad has been there. My brother has been there. I had to move back in with my parents and learn new skills at a vocational college. My brother did too. My brother had to re-do high school as well. That's just life. Sometimes it sucks, but that's how the economy grows.

Fri, 04/25/2014 - 18:50 | 4697513 Seer
Seer's picture

The end of growth was rooted as far back as "go forth and multiply."  Now, if you skip past the issue of operating under a completely flawed basis, then one might look to 1971 as THE  demarcation point.  It's at that time that: 1) The US went off the gold standard; 2) US oil production peaked; 3) Trade relations with China opened up.

WIth that in mind, the recent finanicial meltdown can be thought of as the moment the first shot was fired.  We know that wars are always underway well before the first shot is heard...

"This is how the economy grows. It constantly becomes more efficient as technology improves."

Efficiency means doing more with less.  Stop and think about that.  If there was an infinite amount of shit then there would be absolutely no reason to be more "efficient."  And of course there isn't, which means that we  have a finite set of resources with which to operate with.  Yes, here were are, striving to have more and more "growth,' which can ONLY occur by way of increasing the consumption of those finite resources.  John Jevons demonstrated the efficiency trap- Jevons Paradox.

"I know it sucks when your job is eliminated and you need to find something else. I've been there. My dad has been there. My brother has been there. I had to move back in with my parents and learn new skills at a vocational college. My brother did too. My brother had to re-do high school as well. That's just life. Sometimes it sucks, but that's how the economy grows."

My wife is from the Philippines.  Tell me how tough it is here...  Economic growth cannot be eternal, sorry, this is a finite planet.  But, good for you in serving the masters, for running harder on their "economic growth" treadmill; I'm pretty sure they'll thank you for it.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 13:36 | 4699088 Matt
Matt's picture

The Earth is finite, but the universe, for practical purposes, can be considered infinite. It seems probable that Humans will be another species eliminated by The Great Filter, not because of bad luck or lack of opportunity, but as a result of collective choices made.

Sat, 04/26/2014 - 21:42 | 4700152 Seer
Seer's picture

Energy is EVERYTHING (w/o energy there is no life).  Humans are relegated to its constraints: and until we can travel at the speed of light I'll hold on to the belief.  Other issue is that suffer from hubris, thinking that we are somehow signifcantly different from other life forms on earth.  Hubris is all that differentiates...

Sun, 04/27/2014 - 02:48 | 4700555 polo007
polo007's picture

According to Tullett Prebon Group Limited:

http://www.tullettprebon.com/Documents/strategyinsights/TPSI_009_Perfect_Storm_009.pdf

perfect storm

energy, finance and the end of growth

Summary

The economy as we know it is facing a lethal confluence of four critical factors – the fall-out from the biggest debt bubble in history; a disastrous experiment with globalisation; the massaging of data to the point where economic trends are obscured; and, most important of all, the approach of an energy-returns cliff-edge.

Through technology, through culture and through economic and political change, society is more short-term in nature now than at any time in recorded history. Financial market participants can carry out transactions in milliseconds. With 24-hour news coverage, the media focus has shifted inexorably from the analytical to the immediate. The basis of politicians’ calculations has shortened to the point where it can seem that all that matters is the next sound-bite, the next headline and the next snapshot of public opinion. The corporate focus has moved all too often from strategic planning to immediate profitability as represented by the next quarter’s earnings.

This report explains that this acceleration towards ever-greater immediacy has blinded society to a series of fundamental economic trends which, if not anticipated and tackled well in advance, could have devastating effects. The relentless shortening of media, social and political horizons has resulted in the establishment of self-destructive economic patterns which now threaten to undermine economic viability.

We date the acceleration in short-termism to the early 1980s. Since then, there has been a relentless shift to immediate consumption as part of something that has been called a “cult of self-worship”. The pursuit of instant gratification has resulted in the accumulation of debt on an unprecedented scale. The financial crisis, which began in 2008 and has since segued into the deepest and most protracted economic slump for at least eighty years, did not result entirely from a short period of malfeasance by a tiny minority, comforting though this illusion may be. Rather, what began in 2008 was the denouement of a broadly-based process which had lasted for thirty years, and is described here as “the great credit super-cycle”.

The credit super-cycle process is exemplified by the relationship between GDP and aggregate credit market debt in the United States (see fig. 1.1). In 1945, and despite the huge costs involved in winning the Second World War, the aggregate indebtedness of American businesses, individuals and government equated to 159% of GDP. More than three decades later, in 1981, this ratio was little changed, at 168%. In real terms, total debt had increased by 214% since 1945, but the economy had grown by 197%, keeping the debt ratio remarkably static over an extended period which, incidentally, was far from shock-free (since it included two major oil crises).

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!